Những vấn đề căn bản của cấu trúc thông tin tiếng Anh ở cấp độ ngôn bản
Nội dung chính của bài viết
Tóm tắt
Bài báo này đề cập đến các vấn đề căn bản của cấu trúc thông tin tiếng Anh ở cấp độ diễn ngôn. Các vấn đề liên quan đến cấu trúc thông tin tiếng Anh ở cấp độ diễn ngôn rất đa dạng, phong phú và được xem xét từ nhiều góc độ khác nhau. Việc lựa chọn vấn đề và góc độ thảo luận trong bài báo bắt nguồn từ mục đích của tác giả trong việc tìm ra những điểm căn bản nhất có thể đưa vào đường hướng nhận thức siêu ngôn ngữ trong việc dạy kỹ năng đọc-viết cho học viên học tiếng Anh như ngôn ngữ thứ hai. Các vấn đề được lựa chọn bao gồm: các thuộc tính của thông tin ở cấp độ ngôn bản, quan hệ liên kết, cấu trúc thông tin theo đường hướng quan hệ mệnh đề trong phân tích văn bản, và cấu trúc thông tin nhìn từ góc độ phân tích thể loại văn bản. Ba thuộc tính của thông tin được bàn đến là: tính xác chứng, tính tương hỗ và tính văn bản. Các vấn đề liên quan đến đường hướng quan hệ mệnh đề bao gồm: khái niệm quan hệ mệnh đề, các phương tiện liên kết trong đường hướng quan hệ mệnh đề, các quan hệ mệnh đề cơ bản, các dấu hiệu quan trọng thể hiện tính mạnh lạc của văn bản trong quan hệ mệnh đề, và các kiểu mẫu văn bản căn bản. Đường hướng phân tích thể loại văn bản bao trùm việc phân tích nhiều thể loại văn bản khác nhau. Thể loại được lựa chọn để phân tích trong bài báo này là thể loại văn bản học thuật. Hai vấn đề liên quan đến cấu trúc thông tin của văn bản học thuật được đề cập là cấu trúc và đặc điểm của văn bản học thuật.
Chi tiết bài viết
Từ khóa
Thuộc tính của thông tin, quan hệ liên kết, đường hướng quan hệ mệnh đề, phân tích thể loại văn bản, văn bản học thuật
Tài liệu tham khảo
[1] Huỳnh Anh Tuấn. (2013). Fundamental Sentential Level Issues of English Information Structure. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 29,4, 45-62.
[2] Paprotté, W., & Sinha, C. (1987). A Functional Perspective on Early Language Development. In M. Hickmann (Eds.), Social and Functional Approaches to Language and Thought. Academic Press (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich), 203-222.
[3] Grice, P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In Cole, P., & J.L. Morgan (Eds). Speech Acts. Academic Press, 41-58.
[4] Givón, T. (1982). Evidentiality and epistemic space. Studies in Language, 6, 1, 23-49.
[5] Clark, H., Schreuder, R., & Buttrick, S. (1983). Common Ground and the Understanding of Demonstrative Reference. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 22, 245-258.
[6] Rommetveit, R. (1974). On Message Structure: A framework for the study of language and communication. John Wiley and Sons.
[7] Quirk, R., et al. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Longman.
[8] Ward, G., and Birner, B.J. (2001). Discourse and Information Structure. In D. Schiffrin, Tannen, D. and Hamilton, H.E. (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Blackwell Publishing, 119-137.
[9] Reinhart, T. (1981). Pragmatics and Linguistics: An Analysis of Sentence Topics. Philosophica, 27, 1, 53-94.
[10] Fraurud, K. (1990). Definiteness and the Processing of NPs in Natural Discourse. Journal of Semantics, 7, 395-433.
[11] Garrod, S.C., & Sanford, A.J. (1994). Resolving sentences in a discourse context: How discourse representation affects language understanding. In M.A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics. Academic Press, 675-698.
[12] Hawkins, J. A. (1978). Definiteness and indefiniteness. Humanities Press.
[13] Hawkins, J. A. (1991). On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics, 27, 405-442.
[14] Winter, E. (1971). Connection in Science Material: A Proposition about the Semantics of Clause Relations. Centre for Information on Language Teaching Papers and Reports, 7, 41-52.
[15] Hoey, M. (1983). On the Surface of Discourse. George Allen and Unwin.
[16] Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of Lexis in Text. OUP.
[17] Hoey, M. (1994). Signaling in Discourse: A Functional Analysis of a Common Discourse Pattern in Written and Spoken English. In M. Coulthard (Eds.), Advances in Written Text Analysis. Routledge, 26-45.
[18] Hoey, M. (2001). Textual Interaction. Routledge.
[19] McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. CUP.
[20] McCarthy, M., and Carter, R. (1994). Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching. Longman.
[21] Crombie, W. (1985a). Process and Relation in Discourse and Language Teaching (a). OUP.
[22] Crombie, W. (1985b). Discourse and Language Learning: A Relational Approach to Syllabus Design. OUP.
[23] Jordan, M.P. (1984). Rhetoric of Everyday English Texts. George Allen and Unwin.
[24] Jordan, M.P. (1992). An integrated three-pronged analysis of a fund-raising letter. In W.E. Mannand S.A. Thompson (eds). Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analysis of a Fund-Raising Text. John Benjamins, 171-226.
[25] Winter, E. (1994). Clause Relations as Information Structure: Two Basic Text Structures in English. In M. Coulthard (Eds.), Advances in Written Text Analysis. Routledge, 46-68.
[26] Hasan, R. (1985). The structure of a text in Halliday. In M. A. K. Halliday, and Hasan, R. (Eds.), Language, context, and text: aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Deakin University Press, 52-69.
[27] Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold.
[28] Winter, E. O. (1974). Replacement as a function of repetition: a study of some of its principal features in the clause relations of contemporary English. University of London Press.
[29] Winter, E. O. (1979). Replacement as a fundamental function of the sentence in context. Forum Linguisticum, 4, 2, 95-133.
[30] Cook, G. (1989). Discourse. OUP.
[31] Winter, E. O. (1977). A clause relational approach to English texts: A study of some predictive lexical items in written discourse. Instructional science, 6, 1, 1-92.
[32] Winter, E. O. (1978). A look at the role of certain words in information structure. Informatics 3. Aslib.
[33] Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge.
[34] Martin, J.R. (1993). A contextual theory of language. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The Powers of Literacy – A Genre Approach to Teaching Writing. University of Pittsburgh Press, 116-36.
[35] Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edition). Arnold.
[36] Quirk, R., et al. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. Longman.
[37] Coulthard, M. (1994). On analysing and evaluating written text. In M. Coulthard (Eds.), Advances in Written Text Analysis. Routledge, 1-11.
[38] Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press.
[39] Bhatia, V. K. (2002). A Generic View of Academic Discourse. In J. Flowerdew (Eds.), Academic Discourse. Longman, 21-39.
[40] Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. Longman.
[41] Bhatia, V. K. (2000). Integrating Discursive Competence and Professional Practice: A New Challenge for ESP. TESOL Colloquium: Rethinking ESP for the New Century. Vancouver.
[42] Dudley-Evans, T. (1993). Variation in Communication Patterns between Discourse Communities: The Case of Highway Engineering and Plant Biology. In G. Blue (Eds.), Language, Learning, and Success: Studying through English. Macmillan and Modern English Publications,
[43] Dudley-Evans, T. (1995). Genre Models for the Teaching of Academic Writing to Second Language Speakers: Advantages and Disadvantages. Journal of TESOL France 2, 2, 181-192.
[44] Dudley-Evans, T. (2002). The Teaching of the Academic Essay: Is a Genre Approach Possible? In A. M. Johns (Eds.), Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives. LEA, 225-235.
[45] Swales, J. M. (1981). Aspects of Article Introductions. University of Aston, Language Studies Unit.
[46] Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. CUP.
[47] Miller, C.R. (1984). Genre as Social Action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70, 151-67.
[48] Berkenkotter, C. & Huckin, T.N. (1995). Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication-Cognition/Culture/Power. LEA Publishers.
[49] Myers, G. (1992). Textbooks and the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. English for Specific Purposes, 11.
[50] Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interaction in Academic Writing. Longman Pearson Education.
[51] Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP Rhetoric: Metacontext in Finnish-English Economics Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 3-22.
[52] Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the Language Learning Classroom. The University of Michigan Press.
[53] Johns, A. M. (Eds.) (2002). Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives, LEA.
[54] Grabe, W. (2002). Narrative and Expository Macro-genres. In A. M. Johns (Eds.), Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives. LEA, 249-268.
[55] Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. The University of Michigan Press.
[56] Hyland, K. (1990). A genre description of the argumentative essay. RELC Journal, 21, 1, 66-78.
[57] O'Brien, T. (1995). Rhetorical Structure Analysis and the Case of Inaccurate, Incoherent Source-hopper. Applied Linguistics, 16, 442-482.
[58] Young, L. (1994). University Lectures: Macro-structures and Marco-features. In J. Flowerdew (Eds.), Academic Listening: Research Perspectives. CUP, 159-176.
[59] Hinds, J. (1987). Reader vs. Writer Responsibility: A New Topology. In U. Connor, & Kaplan, R.B. (Eds.), Writing across Languages: Analysis of L2 Text. Addison-Wesley, 141-152.
[60] [60]. Swales, J. M., and Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills-A Course for Non-native Speakers of English. University of Michigan.
[61] Hinkel, E. (1997). Indirectness in L1 and L2 Academic Writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 361-386. Elsevier.
[62] Kaplan, R. B. (1987). Cultural Thought Patterns Revisited. In U. Connor, and Kaplan, R.B. (Eds.), Writing Across Languages: Analysis of L2 Texts. Addison-Wesley.
[63] Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural Aspects of Second Language Writing. CUP.
[64] Clyne, M. (1987). Cultural Differences in the Organization of Academic Texts. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 211-247.
[65] Clyne, M. (1994). Inter-cultural Communication at Work. CUP.
[66] Gee, P. (1990). Social Linguistics and Literacies. RoutledgeFalmer Publishers.
[67] Leki, I. (1991). Twenty-five Years of Contrastive Rhetoric: Text Analysis and Writing Pedagogies. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 1, 123-143.
[68] Leki, I. (1992). Understanding ESL Writers: a Guide for Teachers. Boynton-Cook.
[2] Paprotté, W., & Sinha, C. (1987). A Functional Perspective on Early Language Development. In M. Hickmann (Eds.), Social and Functional Approaches to Language and Thought. Academic Press (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich), 203-222.
[3] Grice, P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In Cole, P., & J.L. Morgan (Eds). Speech Acts. Academic Press, 41-58.
[4] Givón, T. (1982). Evidentiality and epistemic space. Studies in Language, 6, 1, 23-49.
[5] Clark, H., Schreuder, R., & Buttrick, S. (1983). Common Ground and the Understanding of Demonstrative Reference. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 22, 245-258.
[6] Rommetveit, R. (1974). On Message Structure: A framework for the study of language and communication. John Wiley and Sons.
[7] Quirk, R., et al. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Longman.
[8] Ward, G., and Birner, B.J. (2001). Discourse and Information Structure. In D. Schiffrin, Tannen, D. and Hamilton, H.E. (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Blackwell Publishing, 119-137.
[9] Reinhart, T. (1981). Pragmatics and Linguistics: An Analysis of Sentence Topics. Philosophica, 27, 1, 53-94.
[10] Fraurud, K. (1990). Definiteness and the Processing of NPs in Natural Discourse. Journal of Semantics, 7, 395-433.
[11] Garrod, S.C., & Sanford, A.J. (1994). Resolving sentences in a discourse context: How discourse representation affects language understanding. In M.A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics. Academic Press, 675-698.
[12] Hawkins, J. A. (1978). Definiteness and indefiniteness. Humanities Press.
[13] Hawkins, J. A. (1991). On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics, 27, 405-442.
[14] Winter, E. (1971). Connection in Science Material: A Proposition about the Semantics of Clause Relations. Centre for Information on Language Teaching Papers and Reports, 7, 41-52.
[15] Hoey, M. (1983). On the Surface of Discourse. George Allen and Unwin.
[16] Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of Lexis in Text. OUP.
[17] Hoey, M. (1994). Signaling in Discourse: A Functional Analysis of a Common Discourse Pattern in Written and Spoken English. In M. Coulthard (Eds.), Advances in Written Text Analysis. Routledge, 26-45.
[18] Hoey, M. (2001). Textual Interaction. Routledge.
[19] McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. CUP.
[20] McCarthy, M., and Carter, R. (1994). Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching. Longman.
[21] Crombie, W. (1985a). Process and Relation in Discourse and Language Teaching (a). OUP.
[22] Crombie, W. (1985b). Discourse and Language Learning: A Relational Approach to Syllabus Design. OUP.
[23] Jordan, M.P. (1984). Rhetoric of Everyday English Texts. George Allen and Unwin.
[24] Jordan, M.P. (1992). An integrated three-pronged analysis of a fund-raising letter. In W.E. Mannand S.A. Thompson (eds). Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analysis of a Fund-Raising Text. John Benjamins, 171-226.
[25] Winter, E. (1994). Clause Relations as Information Structure: Two Basic Text Structures in English. In M. Coulthard (Eds.), Advances in Written Text Analysis. Routledge, 46-68.
[26] Hasan, R. (1985). The structure of a text in Halliday. In M. A. K. Halliday, and Hasan, R. (Eds.), Language, context, and text: aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Deakin University Press, 52-69.
[27] Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold.
[28] Winter, E. O. (1974). Replacement as a function of repetition: a study of some of its principal features in the clause relations of contemporary English. University of London Press.
[29] Winter, E. O. (1979). Replacement as a fundamental function of the sentence in context. Forum Linguisticum, 4, 2, 95-133.
[30] Cook, G. (1989). Discourse. OUP.
[31] Winter, E. O. (1977). A clause relational approach to English texts: A study of some predictive lexical items in written discourse. Instructional science, 6, 1, 1-92.
[32] Winter, E. O. (1978). A look at the role of certain words in information structure. Informatics 3. Aslib.
[33] Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge.
[34] Martin, J.R. (1993). A contextual theory of language. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The Powers of Literacy – A Genre Approach to Teaching Writing. University of Pittsburgh Press, 116-36.
[35] Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edition). Arnold.
[36] Quirk, R., et al. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. Longman.
[37] Coulthard, M. (1994). On analysing and evaluating written text. In M. Coulthard (Eds.), Advances in Written Text Analysis. Routledge, 1-11.
[38] Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press.
[39] Bhatia, V. K. (2002). A Generic View of Academic Discourse. In J. Flowerdew (Eds.), Academic Discourse. Longman, 21-39.
[40] Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. Longman.
[41] Bhatia, V. K. (2000). Integrating Discursive Competence and Professional Practice: A New Challenge for ESP. TESOL Colloquium: Rethinking ESP for the New Century. Vancouver.
[42] Dudley-Evans, T. (1993). Variation in Communication Patterns between Discourse Communities: The Case of Highway Engineering and Plant Biology. In G. Blue (Eds.), Language, Learning, and Success: Studying through English. Macmillan and Modern English Publications,
[43] Dudley-Evans, T. (1995). Genre Models for the Teaching of Academic Writing to Second Language Speakers: Advantages and Disadvantages. Journal of TESOL France 2, 2, 181-192.
[44] Dudley-Evans, T. (2002). The Teaching of the Academic Essay: Is a Genre Approach Possible? In A. M. Johns (Eds.), Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives. LEA, 225-235.
[45] Swales, J. M. (1981). Aspects of Article Introductions. University of Aston, Language Studies Unit.
[46] Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. CUP.
[47] Miller, C.R. (1984). Genre as Social Action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70, 151-67.
[48] Berkenkotter, C. & Huckin, T.N. (1995). Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication-Cognition/Culture/Power. LEA Publishers.
[49] Myers, G. (1992). Textbooks and the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. English for Specific Purposes, 11.
[50] Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interaction in Academic Writing. Longman Pearson Education.
[51] Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP Rhetoric: Metacontext in Finnish-English Economics Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 3-22.
[52] Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the Language Learning Classroom. The University of Michigan Press.
[53] Johns, A. M. (Eds.) (2002). Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives, LEA.
[54] Grabe, W. (2002). Narrative and Expository Macro-genres. In A. M. Johns (Eds.), Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives. LEA, 249-268.
[55] Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. The University of Michigan Press.
[56] Hyland, K. (1990). A genre description of the argumentative essay. RELC Journal, 21, 1, 66-78.
[57] O'Brien, T. (1995). Rhetorical Structure Analysis and the Case of Inaccurate, Incoherent Source-hopper. Applied Linguistics, 16, 442-482.
[58] Young, L. (1994). University Lectures: Macro-structures and Marco-features. In J. Flowerdew (Eds.), Academic Listening: Research Perspectives. CUP, 159-176.
[59] Hinds, J. (1987). Reader vs. Writer Responsibility: A New Topology. In U. Connor, & Kaplan, R.B. (Eds.), Writing across Languages: Analysis of L2 Text. Addison-Wesley, 141-152.
[60] [60]. Swales, J. M., and Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills-A Course for Non-native Speakers of English. University of Michigan.
[61] Hinkel, E. (1997). Indirectness in L1 and L2 Academic Writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 361-386. Elsevier.
[62] Kaplan, R. B. (1987). Cultural Thought Patterns Revisited. In U. Connor, and Kaplan, R.B. (Eds.), Writing Across Languages: Analysis of L2 Texts. Addison-Wesley.
[63] Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural Aspects of Second Language Writing. CUP.
[64] Clyne, M. (1987). Cultural Differences in the Organization of Academic Texts. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 211-247.
[65] Clyne, M. (1994). Inter-cultural Communication at Work. CUP.
[66] Gee, P. (1990). Social Linguistics and Literacies. RoutledgeFalmer Publishers.
[67] Leki, I. (1991). Twenty-five Years of Contrastive Rhetoric: Text Analysis and Writing Pedagogies. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 1, 123-143.
[68] Leki, I. (1992). Understanding ESL Writers: a Guide for Teachers. Boynton-Cook.